BA1 No.315 of 2016
Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J.
Mr. Pawan Mishra, Advocate for
Mr. Subhash Tyagi Bhardwaj,
Deputy Advocate General for the State of
Heard learned counsel for the
This is first bail application moved
by the applicant seeking regular bail in
Case Crime No. 320 of 2015, under
Section 377 I.P.C. and under Section
3/4 of Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at
Police Station Patelnagar, District
The applicant was arrested in
connection with above F.I.R. As per the
F.I.R., on 29.10.2015, applicant entered
into the toilet of the school, where the
son of the complainant studies. The
applicant entered his private part into
the mouth of the victim, namely,
Tanmay (son of the complainant).
Learned counsel for the applicant
contented that the applicant has falsely
been implicated in the instant crime;
has no criminal history and is
languishing in jail since 02.11.2015. He
submitted that the F.I.R. is delayed one,
inasmuch as, the same was registered
after a lapse of four days. He submitted
that the applicant is 19 years of age and
is doing studies in Dehradun. He
argued that it is highly improbable that,
after committing the alleged crime, the
applicant will again come to the school.
He contended that Tanmay has wrongly
identified the applicant. He submitted
that in case the applicant is granted
bail, he will not misuse the same and
will furnish the bail surety as per the
satisfaction of this Court.
Learned Deputy Advocate General
vehemently opposed the bail application.
He submitted that, from the bare
perusal of the F.I.R., it is evident that
the victim was subjected to the alleged
offence. He submitted that specific role
has been assigned to the present
applicant and, as such, applicant should
not be granted bail.
I have considered the submission
advanced by the learned counsel for the
parties. I am not inclined to grant bail to
the applicant at this stage. The bail
application is rejected.
(V.K. Bist, J)